019. Igal Moria

Igal Moria was infected with the spiritual bug in his teens has no plans of recovering. He joined Maharishi Mahesh Yogi at 19 (in 1973) and was involved with the TM movement for 25 years, working with Maharishi on developing courses and course materials on Maharishi Vedic Science and world religions. He came across the teaching of spiritual teacher Andrew Cohen, and instantly resonated with the depth and seriousness of Cohen’s work. He is a member of Andrew Cohen’s core body of students.

Articles referred to in the interview or recommended by Igal:

  • Andrew Cohen’s five tenets of evolutionary enlightenment.
  • Andrew Cohen on meditation
  • Older article in which Andrew tells the story of how he discovered the bigger view, the one that includes Becoming
  • Numerous articles that give an overview of Andrew’s teaching

Interview recorded 4/21/2010

Video and audio below. Audio also available as a Podcast. Video also available in 20-minute segments on Facebook.

8 thoughts on “019. Igal Moria

  1. I listened to Igal’s interview the other day and have been waiting for someone to comment. I don’t feel qualified to discuss Cohen’s “new enlightenment” vs “old enlightenment”, and would be very interested in what some of the other interviewees have to say about this.

    Igal’s story is compelling, and I shared his concern for “enlightened” behaviour, or at least ethical behaviour amongst TM teachers and organisers. I my day (very early days in the wider TM movement), teachers and organisers seemed to have the “end justifies the means” approach, and I found this disconcerting, for like Igal, I was looking for examples and guidance and firmly believed that the end was the means. Perhaps I was naive, but I took heart when Igal expressed the same sentiment. I am pleased for him that he has found a teaching which incorporates all aspects of human behaviour. Although I have some reservations about his choice, I wish Igal all the best.

    Given the intention of these interviews, I would have liked to have heard more about Igal’s inner experiences on the level of consciousness.


  2. Thanks for your comment, Joan.

    Regarding your reservations about my choice: what I was trying to convey was that it was almost choice-less. There was more a recognition of the inevitability, and while I tried to negotiate with it for a while, at one point I realized that “resistance is futile.”

    As for my “inner experience at the level of consciousness:” IMHO, and as I have tried to convey in my talk with Rick, it’s not half as relevant as we–postmodern, self-infatuated Western narcissist at the 21st Century–would like to believe (I obviously don’t know you and you may be the one non-narcissistic exception in this generation, but generally speaking, boomers such as you and me are afflicted with the disease).

    This can be a subject of another conversation, which Rick and I may conduct at some future date.

  3. Igal, it was a pleasure to listen to you talk. Good job.

    Like Joan, I wondered what you were doing on the program if you were not talking about your experience of enlightenment. Far from being a narcissistic indulgence, I view Buddha at the Gas Pump series as an empirical inquiry into a state that for many has been merely hypothetical, and for many others is outright mythical. It’s good to lay it out in concrete terms.

    Next time, if you would, please talk about the connections between enlightenment and behavior as you’ve experienced them. There’s another area that boasts lots of theory but precious little empiricism. What are you discovering about the connection – or absence of connection?


  4. Fair enough, Patrick. If Rick and I pick this up again, this would be something to go into. Thank you.

  5. Hi all,

    I’ve just returned from retreat and am catching up on Batgap. Igal, I am a boomer and I am narcissistic, but no more narcissistic that the thousands, maybe millions, of others over time who have sought enlightenment. As the Greeks knew, narcissism is not solely a “boomer” affliction.

    This implicaton that the search and desire for personal enlightenment is a postmodern affliction is nonsense, as this very blog attests to. To say so, to me, is just claiming “sour grapes”, i.e., if I can’t reach it, it’s not worth having. This attitude to me is even more narcissistic as it affirms the supremacy of the ego and may in fact be a technique the ego uses to protect itself. I observe my own ego playing these little games with me, so that’s why I respond in this way.

    I really look forward to hearing you discuss you personal experience of consciousness in a future interview, as that what Batgap is for, and I treasure many of the discussions Rick has brought to us.

    Many thanks to both you and Rick for engendering this discussion. I would like to hear more comments on this “new” enlightenment.

    Best wishes,

  6. Igal,
    I don’t doubt your sincerity, but you seem like a very ego based fanatic – you have just swapped Maharishi for Andrew Cohen. what you are doing does not apeal to me in any way.
    I broke away from TM and all other Cults a long time ago – I still meditate the TM way but with a different mantra.
    Why not think for yourself and live a little?
    I wish you well.

  7. I just saw the Igal interview for the first time. I certainly claim no level of “authority” on my part, but I would just observe that the seemingly always prevalent theme of “realizing what it is that you already are” doesn’t seem to have a place in this teaching. It seems rather to be a very driven push toward “development”, I guess. To me, the “flavor” of the intensity and seriousness is almost a little scary………….

  8. Thanks, Egal and Rick, for this interview. I must that the thoughts that come to me when I listen seems sometimes very ‘off topic’, to me, from anything said in the interview, but my mind seems to get its attention grabbed, and there I run (but there was at least a phrase or a word that acted as a catalyst though). If these thoughts belong somewhere else (besides in general comments) then I will wait for your mention (I am not the most internet savvy person).

    Seeing and Enlightenment are two very different things, yet such a distinction is not often recognized. And that’s okay. If what is called ‘Enlightenment’ is the same as – or at least similar to – what is called ‘Awakening’, or ‘Realization’, or even ‘Super-Consciousness’ then it must mean also that it is a reference to simply waking up from some kind of sleep state. It also assumes an ability for one to wake up. Everyone who comes into the world wakes up (whether from birth, into life or a bed, into a day). All such are fully awake, eventually. And, no different from a newborn, the eyes do not see right away. [It may be noted that the term ‘Super-Consciousness’, in some groups, might mean awakening as well as the eyes being opened, but for the purpose of writing only in generalization, that phrase will do, and I will not expand upon it.] Sometimes we can become so wrapped up with experiences that we forget the most minor of distinctions. [The mind is a wondrous imitator to Truth]

Leave a Reply